This post is the first of five posts that will dig deeper into the issue areas that will be featured at the SDC’s Symposium on Poverty – Family Relationships, Community Violence & Public Safety, Community Development, Neighborhood Development, and Job Creation & Workforce Development.
The SDC Healthy Relationships and Marriage Enhancement Program submitted a proposal in collaboration with The Alma Center and Sojourner Family Peace Center to be a part of the 2010 Poverty Symposium held on Wednesday, November 10 at the Italian Community Center. The presentation will focus on the history and importance of healthy relationships and marriages, domestic violence, and responsible fatherhood and will provide participants the opportunity to share their input regarding the needs and strengths of their communities.
**
As a refresher, the SDC recently published the results of a comprehensive community needs assessment. [Reports can be found here: SDC 2010 Community Needs Assessment]. As Dave reports in his last post, “Poverty and the Impoverished”, the telephone survey produced some noteworthy results. Approximately 93% of respondents identified family relationships as a top barrier to getting out of poverty. Seventy-two percent also indicated that not enough was being done to reduce poverty in terms of family relationships.
In terms of poverty, why should we (society) care about family relationships? Is there evidence out there, beyond results from the SDC’s need assessment, to support the idea that individuals in poverty experience different family relationships than individuals not in poverty? Are unhealthy family relationships a cause or symptom of poverty?
Admittedly, these are difficult questions to answer and are restricted in a sense by bias and personal attitudes towards those who are poor. In order to explore further, family relationships should be conceptually defined. While there are commonly accepted definitions of ‘family’ that are used regularly in the media and academia, individuals tend to perceive their concept of family in line with other norms and mores of the times and environment. It is an arduous task to standardize the concept of family over time. Thinking of the 1960’s, the word ‘family’ invokes imagery of a nuclear family – complete with a married husband and wife and children living in one habitat. This was a marketed norm of the times. Fast forward to 2010, it is not uncommon for divorced parents to share custody of their children or for couples to live together without being married or to be a single parent.
This is an important point for connecting poverty and family relationships. Respondents in the needs assessment were not asked to first define their concept of family before providing an answer to the questions asked of them. Out of 420 respondents, 113 were single and never married, 207 were married, 60 were divorced, 32 were widowed, and 7 were unmarried, but living with their partner. About one in three households also reported children in their household. Three quarters were above the poverty level. Thus, when individuals identified family relationships as a barrier to getting out of poverty, they were more than likely thinking of family in different ways because of their own experiences, yet still felt it was important.
I go back to my earlier questions: Is there evidence out there, beyond results from the SDC’s need assessment, to support the idea that individuals in poverty experience different family relationships than individuals not in poverty? Are unhealthy family relationships a cause or symptom of poverty?
There are literally thousands of studies, books, and articles available on the subject of family and poverty. Furthermore, political scientists, sociologists, psychologists, economists, and anthropologists (to name a few) spend a considerable amount of time and resources trying to distinguish between root causes and symptoms of poverty. The data is overwhelming and to date, there is no consensus.
Rather than turning to the work of researchers, I turn to the professionals that work in this area to try and connect the dots. Tondalayo Davis, a relationship educator in the SDC’s Healthy Relationships and Marriage Enhancement Program, offers that
For many people, relationships, often times, are the focal points of one’s life. Even here [at work] recently, work-life balance has generated a lot of buzz. According to those that sound off, for them, it’s the anchor that helps maintain solid relationships. Now, let’s teeter beyond the brink of imbalance with joblessness; homelessness; the lack of transportation; emotional distress; and mental and physical abuse. To say the least under these circumstances work-life balance is not an option or even relevant. However, for those that face such frustrating adversities, the reality of those day to day challenges make relationships an after thought and frequently not a priority; hence, a vicious cycle of unhealthy relationships continues. Relationship education is critical to the vitality of the community. As a result of a healthy, happy relationship, a person can focus to perform better at work, be more productive in school, and parent more effectively.
This intuitively makes sense. Regardless of how family relationships are viewed structurally or what isolated issues are considered, it is tough to make relationships a priority when other needs are not met and it is difficult to meet needs when additional support and/or stability is missing.
Moving forward, how can the community address this?
Brittany Rosales
Policy Analyst
Social Development Commission
SDC Blog - Unitched Ears Main Page